I couldn't care less whether or not the game is PC. It's just not any fun, not to me anyway. And leave it to EA to release a demo of a game that's already been out for several months. Yet more evidence that EA has its finger on the pulse of its customers.

I put Morrowind in the same catagory as The Sims, Deer Hunter and Myst. It's a successful game whose popularity I cannot fathom. It's not even that I find the game overwhelming--if anything it's quite the opposite. Even on my kickass ubermachine (with all the graphics maxed) it absolutely bores me to tears. Replayability? Whatever. I beat the game ONCE, but that's because I make it point to finish anything I start. After that, I couldn't get it off my drive fast enough. And this is the opinion of someone who's been playing RPGs for over 20 years now. Morrowind is dullsville.

My biggest gripe about Morrowind is that it's mind-numbingly boring. Who cares if a game is open-ended if you spend most of your time just walking around looking at textures? Oh, and ALL the NPC interaction is text based... and not just a little bit of text either, but HUGE reams of tiny, repetitive text.

NWN's plot was weak and the voice acting was--at best--uneven, but the world felt much less barren. I'd much rather have a restrictive, detailed plot where things are always going on, than an open-ended, sterile world populated by painfully flat NPCs.

ChristianP, I don't think it was mystery to *anyone* here as to why the Breed weren't appearing until the player got within a certain range. Obviously the devs don't want the Breed standing around when not in sight of the player...

Aha, there's the problem! If a player can see where a Breed *will* be upon approaching then he should be able to see the Breed there NOW. Nothing else is acceptable. If the engine can't handle having that Breed be present and visible when IT SHOULD BE... then either the engine is broken or the level should've been designed differently. Period.

I liked the demo. Yeah, it has a number of issues (all of which others have mentioned) but I had fun (and that's all that matters to me).

I tellya though, I don't know what's up with the commander guy. Some of his pronunciations sound Canadian... and yet he draws out the vowel of tiiiiime like he's from Texas or something. Those wacky Candadian Texans, I tell you what.

"This play [game] is really good. I might have played as God, and as the people insulted, will me I her also to thrash fasten storm and fight. I like each possible play, in which I steer the world with mine alone sake. If you do not like this play, and to cry you go spineless to American."

It's not so much the COF thing that people are complaining about. You've said it yourself, it's "how inaccurate all the guns are." The cone of fire for most of these weapons is HUGE compared to other games. Most games use the COF *primarily* to simulate a circumstancial loss of accuracy (i.e. reduced accuracy for running etc.), but Planetside's weapons START OFF inaccurate and get much, much worse as you move and whatnot.

I can appreciate most of the complaints regarding Planetside. When I say I love the game, what I really mean is that I love what it could be. I don't see much indication that it'll ever be what it might have been... sadly.

#19 Yeah, the Cone of Fire business is largely bullshit. I see what they were going for, but they really should have gone about it differently.

#18 Yes, most of Planetside's weapons *are* overly weak (and no, I'm not a big "realism" fan), especially in relation to vehicles. Aircraft in particular should go down a lot easier than they do. As it is, Reavers can just sit there and hover, taking their time to aim--BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR FROM INFANTRY ANTI-AIRCRAFT. Don't even get me started on tanks.